|
The previous topic about guns being overpowered has been closed, and I'm not casting ressurrection on it - the subject here isn't about the guns, but about the gunslinger's Gun Training ability.
Here is a DPR test I ran to compare a bow fighter and a Gunslinger:
Fighter A, level 10, 20 Point-buy, Bowman (not using archer variant) :
18
22
12
8
12
7HPs :
9d10 + 10(DV) + 10(Predilection) + 10(Con) +10(Thoughness) = 9d10 + 40.AC :
10 + 6(Dex) + 8(Armor) + 1(Dodge)
25/17/18Attack :
BAB : +10/+5
Melee -> +14
Ranged -> +16/+11
CMB -> +14
CMD -> 30Damage :
+3 Composite Longbow (Heirloom + Focus + Greater focus + weapon training 2 + specialization) -> +24/+19 (1d8+11, 20x3) +1 under 30 feet, -3/+6 DA, Range 110 feet.
Rapid Shot + Manyshot -> +22/(+22)/+22/+17 (1d8+12, 20x3), +1 under 30 feet, -3/+6 DAFeats :
H. Point-blank shot
1. Rapid Shot
1B. Deadly Aim
2. Weapon Focus
3. Precise shot
4. Weapon specialization
5. Far Shot
6. Manyshot
7. Thoughness
8. Improved Critical
9. Greater weapon focus
10. Vital Strike62000
+2 For & Dex
52000
+3 Composite longbow
33000
+ 4 Mithral chainmail
16000
Gunslinger, level 2, 20 Point-buy, Gunner :
12
26
14
8
12
8HPs :
9d10 + 10(DV) + 10(Predilection) + 20(Con) = 9d10 + 40.AC :
10 + 8(Dex) + 5(Armor)
24/19/15Attack :
BAB : +10/+5
Melee -> +11
Ranged -> +18
CMB -> +11
CMD -> 29Damage :
+3 Pistol (Heirloom + gun training) -> +23/+18 (1d8+11, 20x4) +1 under 30 feet, -3/+6 DA, Range 20 Feet
Rapid Shot -> +21/+21/+16 (1d8+12, 20x4), +1 under 30 feet, -3/+6 DA
- Breaks on a natural 2 or less. -Feats :
H. Point-blank shot
1. Rapid Reload
1. Gunsmith
3. Deadly Aim
4. Rapid shot
5. Precise shot
7. Dodge
8. Improved Critical
9. Mobility62000
+4 Dex
44000
+3 Pistol
26000
+ 4 Quilted cloth
9700
All following use DA + PBS + RS (+ Manyshot for archer fighter).
DPR calculated with Tejòn's DPR calculator.
Against Guardian Naga, CR 10, AC 24 (Touch 15) :
DPR Fighter : 81,23.
DPR Gunslinger : 83,36 (0,95 chance to hit, not counting auto-fail on natural 2).
Against Stone Golem, CR 11, AC 26 (Touch 8) :
DPR Fighter : 70,88.
DPR Gunslinger : 83,36 (0,95 chance to hit, not counting auto-fail on natural 2).
Against Froghemoth, CR 13, AC 28 (Touch 9) :
DPR Fighter : 60,53.
DPR Gunslinger : 83,36 (0,95 chance to hit, not counting auto-fail on natural 2).
Against Crystal Dragon, CR 13, AC 31 (Touch 8) :
DPR Fighter : 45.
DPR Gunslinger : 83,36 (0,95 chance to hit, not counting auto-fail on natural 2).
I don't know if I made a mistake while recalculating this, but I don't think I did. I know a gunslinger is pro at guns and that I didn't count the misfire probability in it, but right now, it seems clear that the gunslinger can inflict much more damage against high AC monsters - and high AC monsters are pretty common at higher levels. I suggest something that Jeremiziah said in a previous post :
What's funny is that the easiest fix to the problem isn't at all to make the gunslinger target normal AC. In fact, if he does that, he's at a DPR of 39.29, which is just silly bad for a full-BaB class. The answer is to change gun training to give half the dex bonus to damage instead of the full dex bonus.
When doing this on the previous test, I get an average damage of 68,54. This is better than an optimized archer fighter only when reaching AC 27, and still inflicts much more damage when higher AC comes into play.
Did I make a mistake somewhere when calculating, or did I forget something ?Is the 1/2 dex bonus to damage something that could really be used for balance's sake ?
Gunslinger can't Rapid Shot without paper cartridges. Are we assuming the gunslinger just uses paper cartridges all the time to pull off these extra attacks?
|
|
Gunslinger can't Rapid Shot without paper cartridges. Are we assuming the gunslinger just uses paper cartridges all the time to pull off these extra attacks?
Yes, there are several thousands of GP voluntarily non-used in each build, and the gunslinger can also craft them at half-price, so I assumed she would do so for each shot - it's far from impossible to do. :)
PO stands for what?
PO stands for what?
I'm guessing here but probably stands for Possible Options.
Apparently it stands for GP.
I personally have no problem with adding DEX to ranged damage. But I don't like the fact that the only way to get it is through the Gunslinger's Gun Training. I think I've suggested it twice already, but I think there should be a new feat released in Ultimate Combat which lets any character gain this ability. My group has been using the Sharpshooter feat from the Iron Kingdoms book:
Sharpshooter
The character's aim with his chosen weapon is incredible, allowing him to strike home when others would merely graze or scratch a target.
Prerequisite: Precise Shot, Weapon Focus with ranged weapon.
Benefit: The character adds his Dexterity modifier to damage while using a ranged weapon with which he has the Weapon Focus feat.
Special: A fell caller or fighter may select Sharpshooter as one of her bonus feats.
I'd rather see Gun Training being more like the Fighter's Weapon Training or the Ranger's Favored Enemy and if anyone wants DEX to ranged damage, they can take this feat (with adjustments if needed).
|
To be fair, that recommendation was based off of a comparison using a revolver.
I suspect that the action economy involved with using non-advanced firearms would mean that gun training is necessary when using those weapons. The reality of it is that, to me, it seems like advanced firearms make the class a little too good, while simple firearms make it really stink - misfire is BRUTAL, and the action economy of reloading those weapons combined with the misfires would just lower the DPR to a prohibitively low level (although the calculations required to "prove" such a thing would be difficult indeed).
|
|
...and I should probably just edit the last post, but I'm too lazy. :-p
Referencing the gunslinger from the "thread that shall not be named", his DPR was 72.25, with a +1 to attack giving 0 (he hit on any attack, no need to even roll given the advanced firearm) and a +1 to damage giving 3.71. An extra attack is worth 24.08.
Let's give him a pepperbox instead.
I guess it's safe to say that the 'slingers DPR varies depending upon when (and obviously if) he misfires. If he misfires on his first shot, then obviously he's doing 0 damage in that round. If he misfires on his second shot, his DPR is 24.08, and if he misfires on his third shot, his DPR is 48.16. Then you have to factor in the quick clear, so the next round, the 'slinger's doing no damage at all.
So, over a two-round period:
Misfire on first shot: 0
Misfire on second shot: 12.04
Misfire on third shot: 24.08
...over 2 rounds, mind you - at which time the gunslinger can return to doing your regularly scheduled 72.25 DPR.
Hopefully, at this time, a picture is emerging in your mind - misfires suck eggs harder than Gollum. A CR 10 monster has ~130 HP, so to say that doing 24 points of damage over two rounds makes you a liability to the party instead of an asset should go without saying.
Of course, Quick Clear can use a grit point to clear the gun in a move action instead of a standard action...but misfires still suck. And if you can't quick clear the gun (as a gunslinger), you're spending an entire day restoring your gun from the broken condition if you have the gunsmith feat and a gunsmith's kit (or by casting a spell or hiring someone to cast one for you - far more likely).
Misfires stink soooo bad that I would be willing to postulate that 80% of grit usage that ever happens in the game (as written) will occur in order to quick clean a weapon as a move action. Furthermore, players who have foresight will maintain a minimum of one grit point at virtually all times in order to quick clean as a move action. With the grit pool as tight as it is already, I don't see this as a good thing.
for a good 2 weeks i be running nothing but tests with my DM and so far the fighter and the gunslinger have always been close with neither/or higher DPR then the other. the problem child comes when we use the revolver....I think the answer we seek is somehow change the weapon to a d6 would probably make it balance, but I don't know if it would really fix it....
|
|
I guess it's safe to say that the 'slingers DPR varies depending upon when (and obviously if) he misfires. If he misfires on his first shot, then obviously he's doing 0 damage in that round. If he misfires on his second shot, his DPR is 24.08, and if he misfires on his third shot, his DPR is 48.16. Then you have to factor in the quick clear, so the next round, the 'slinger's doing no damage at all.
Well, actually, even if it's hard to calculate, maybe the misfire risk IS what balances the Gunslinger in termes of DPR. It does suck hard when you misfire, but I guess this is what it takes to be able to hit so hard on much of the targets.
Suddenly, the magical abilities like "Reliable" and "Steadfest" seem way more useful than we would have guessed...Maybe the half-dex to damage should indeed apply only to advanced firearms then. It's more or less the equivalent of Steadfest Brilliant Energy weapons...
|
|
...but I deviate. The point of this thread is Gun training, so looking at that a bit more closely:
Because a gunslinger hits so often, the only way to really scale damage is through the iterative attack mechanic. Each time the gunslinger earns another iterative attack, he starts doing more damage.
Well duh J, you say, that's true for every character. And you're right. But those classes mostly add things to their damage rolls - all except crossbow users, and we all know there really aren't any of those. And the things that they add scale pretty well with level - Weapon enhancement bonus and strength mods are the two obvious guys, and those definitely have a direct relation to character level. But the gunslinger doesn't add his strength mod to damage, he just adds his weapon's enhancement bonus. UNTIL (dun dun dun) LEVEL 5.
Thanks to gun training, overnight, at level 5, the gunslinger begins to add up to 6 points of damage to every shot. Next level (when he gets his second iterative attack) it's now up to 12 points of damage per round. Mind you, this is almost guaranteed damage, because of the touch AC mechanic. This is really unprecedented in class evolution - over a two level span, we're adding an extra damage die and 8-12 points of damage to the attack routine. That's really good. Add to that that we've probably added Deadly Aim by now, and now we're doing oodles of damage VERY consistantly.
[...]the problem child comes when we use the revolver....I think the answer we seek is somehow change the weapon to a d6 would probably make it balance, but I don't know if it would really fix it....
No, that wouldn't really fix it, because as I've mentioned above, the biggest hunk of damage is coming from the static damage modifier, not from the gun itself. The problem with the revolver is that it never misfires. There's literally no downside to using it.
Yeah, limiting the static damage modifiers somehow is key, because the hit rate is so high. Not sure how best to do that, though.
You are not taking into account the feats necessary to get away with this, dodge,mobility, deft shootist. thats three feats!
otherwise the gunslinger provokes from shooting AND reloading. depending on the gun used, that could be TWO AoOs provoked PER attack!
The archer doesn't require these feats which do not do anything for his DPR in order to 'get away' with his "thing".
Not to mention how many magic bows and arrows vs. magic guns are you going to find, even if the gunslinger is around for years, published modules will have very little in the way of available gunslinger gear. I hate to say it but alot of this is just going to fall back to GM fiat.
Of course he could but magic guns, but he'll have to sell that nifty bow he found (getting half of what it's worth) to pay full for his gun.
How is he incurring all those AoOs? Where is he standing? Good knowledge of combat positioning can alleviate those problems.
the higher AC critters also happen to be mostly big ones, with lots of reach, his touch AC doesn't reach that far, the battlefield schematics aren't always going to allow full range of movement to keep away from multiple enemies.
All you have is theorycraft with no playtesting.
All Gun training does is allow dex to damage, that's what STR already does from level one with melee weapons.
Your really arguing touch AC, which has already been discussed too death and isn't going to change.
|
I agree with pendrag on the feats it takes alot to make your gunslinger effective in close combat without encuring AoOs'. All in all i think advanced firearms are really a game changer and shouldn"t be allowed do to there overwhelming effectiveness and they are simply making the gunslinger far too powerful. As for actual guntraining ability I think it stacks pretty well for the overall class. I agree it does need to add a few components like considered weapon focus for said weapon, and a bonus to hit as well as damage.
though the gunslinger should also be said that they have horribly reload capibilites and if they correct it, once again using feats, and/or using paper cartidges they are penalizied especially that with paper cartidges your misfire rate goes up.
|
|
Your really arguing touch AC, which has already been discussed too death and isn't going to change.
What ? No one is talking about touch AC. The subject here is the damage the Gunslinger can inflict.
Gun training seems actually fair with basic firearms and misfire/low range, as people have explained and argued after my initial question ; but when you get the misfire chance off the table (that is, with advanced firearms), you suddenly get a class able to hit almost all the time with more damage than an optimized longbow fighter and close to no risk involved.This is what I talked about. With Gun Training, advanced firearms are too powerful and way too cheap, even as "wondrous items". And I know any DM can ban them, but it doesn't mean they can't be balanced to make any ban avoidable. :)
|
|
I don't see why the advanced fire arms shouldn't have a misfire chance. If they are based close to the Wild West/Civil War era weaponry they are still prone to misfire chance granted it isn't a significant chance but still is a chance. And on that subject we should not allow the metal cartridges I think there in lies the problem. They are harder to make in that era of history that most fantasy based RPGs are played in. You could still make the advanced firearms, but they too should be rare, but the ammo would be harder in my oppinion.
|
|
How is he incurring all those AoOs? Where is he standing? Good knowledge of combat positioning can alleviate those problems.the higher AC critters also happen to be mostly big ones, with lots of reach, his touch AC doesn't reach that far, the battlefield schematics aren't always going to allow full range of movement to keep away from multiple enemies.
All you have is theorycraft with no playtesting.
All Gun training does is allow dex to damage, that's what STR already does from level one with melee weapons.
Your really arguing touch AC, which has already been discussed too death and isn't going to change.
To try to avoid making Stephen think I'm more of a jerk than I am (which I'm worried he already does, honestly), I'm going to try to reply to this as politely as I can.
Players are going to use firearms with 20' range increments as soon as humanly possible, and for as much time in their adventuring career as humanly possible. The double-barrel pistol and the pepperbox, two of the more attractive options in the Early Firearms category happen to meet this prerequisite. They're going to see the most play. Can we agree on that? I hope we can.
I agree that Deft Shootist is nice to have, but it's far from the absolute end-all-be-all of Feat choices that you're insinuating.
And while I'm fully aware that battles don't take place in a vacuum and often take place against multiple enemies, we're trying to examine damage numbers only. To do so, some base assumptions have to be made. The community (not me!) made those assumptions a long time ago in the thread titled: THE DPR OLYMPICS - OR "I'M NOT THE MECHANIC HERE, IRONSIDES! I MOSTLY JUST HURT PEOPLE!". I'm using the rules in that thread...
...to theorycraft. Which I am not denying. And I hate theorycrafting! I was bored at work, what can I tell you? But I'm glad I did it, because it revealed something interesting (to me, anyway, and apparently to at least a few other people).
Finally, ((((be kind...)))) I am not discussing the touch AC mechanic. I don't care at all - not one bit - whether guns attack touch AC or regular AC. I'm operating under the assumption that they target touch AC and, as such, usually hit their victims. I'm fine with that! And I agree that everyone should be fine with it, and resign themselves to it if they're not.
What I am talking about is Gun Training. I don't think it's a dishonest discussion. No other ranged martial class in the game adds their full Dex bonus to their damage. None. I agree, it's a LOT like how traditional melee fighters add their Strength Mod to their weapon damage...except traditional fighters don't target touch AC. So the question is:
Given that Gunslingers frequently* target touch AC (which, again, I'm FINE with), should they be afforded the benefit of their full dexterity bonus to ranged damage - something no other class in the game receives?
*Please note that I did not say unfailingly.
Before you respond, kindly remind yourself that I am not the enemy. I think the class is actually pretty close. I have no problem with the touch AC thing. I think the damage might be a smidgen high. Stephen might decide that it isn't. Either way, I'm unlikely to play a class whose weapon blows up in their face. In fact, that's the reason I'm not spending a lot of my very limited gaming time playtesting the class - it'd be a waste of my time. But, as an academic exercise, I can certainly try to help the community.
If my doing so is giving anyone offense, I apologize.
I don't see why the advanced fire arms shouldn't have a misfire chance. If they are based close to the Wild West/Civil War era weaponry they are still prone to misfire chance granted it isn't a significant chance but still is a chance. And on that subject we should not allow the metal cartridges I think there in lies the problem. They are harder to make in that era of history that most fantasy based RPGs are played in. You could still make the advanced firearms, but they too should be rare, but the ammo would be harder in my oppinion.
I agree with the misfire chance for advanced. I don't know about it resulting in an explosion though. If they are misfired, they should simply "jam".
Proposal:
Early firearms: have misfire chance, result of second misfire when in "broken" condition is firearm explodes.
Advanced firearms: misfire chance of 1 only, misfire results in "jam", could still be a "broken" condition, but since they are advanced, no chance of exploding.
The difference between early and advanced firearms in Pathfinder shouldn't be huge, because any advanced firearms would be due to RECENT advances on the early gun tech, not years and years of development and experimentation.
For example,
Revolver = normal pistol with the cylinder mechanism; still quite new technology and design, and not perfected like a1800's Colt NavyDragoon, or the peacemaker would be like.
Rifle = normal musket with the rifled barrel, posibly further version could include a revolver cylinder in it to create a revolver rifle, or a simple bolt action or lever-action style loading system, but still much like the musket in looks and operation.
Shot Gun = refined blunderbuss, could be a break-action style rear loader, add a second barrel, etc.
the question is, are the advanced firearms written in stone too? If so, then there is no sense arguing the point. If they aren't, then I think making "advanced" firearms being only somewhat more advanced than the early styles would be the way to go, like I illustrated above.
I still think it's too bad they didn't make the gunsinger a warrior-engineer style class, able to advance their own firearms in various ways through skill checks, innovations, etc. That way, firearm could remain in the "emerging guns" era and still allow for creative development and advancement by the gunslinger without turning to the "commonplace" era to obtain some of the qualities of that era of guns. However, that topic has now sailed since the round 1 playtest.
I just think having advanced firearms soooo much more advanced than the others WILL create too many problems.
I don't think it too late to modified the books but the real question will paizo listen? they seem pretty advent on keeping the guns the way they are...
I don't think it too late to modified the books but the real question will paizo listen? they seem pretty advent on keeping the guns the way they are...
Perhaps they could remove the "may" in thier sidebar about emerging guns. Basically there are no advanced firearms in Golorian and then let DM's add it to thier world if they wish to.
Anyway, that is how I will run my version of Golarian.
While I am not super keen on the touch AC thing, i think it has been proven that the early guns are not overpowered. There are some odd corner cases though...
Advanced guns in D&D make me shudder....
Jerem, yes they should get their full dex to damage.
It's HOW they work.
You really need to try to play one, getting in that close, in light armor, without the feats to prevent AoO madness is extremely risky.
Ammo and reloading amd misfires etc.
But you can't figure in the DPR stuff without figuring frequency of hitting, which is the touch AC arguement, without the combo of the two the class might as well throw spit wad.
when I posted my build in another thread someone told me I didnt do ENOUGH damage (basically 1d8+5) but without dex to damage how else am i supposed to do damage with this character?
Granted mu character is 8th level, but how am I going to do any more damage at higher levels with a pistol than I do now?
I agree that Deft Shootist is nice to have, but it's far from the absolute end-all-be-all of Feat choices that you're insinuating.
When all your class features rely on using a ranged weapon (and Gunslinger is extremely weapon-reliant - take away his firearm and he's just a Warrior), being able to fire and reload your ranged weapon while threatened without eating AoOs seems like a high priority feat.
|
So here's the issue with the math here, Maxx, you're ignoring the misfire chance. That's bad for your numbers. If you misfire on a 1 or 2 on a d20 that's a 1/10 chance. So for every 10 shots, one of those needs to break the weapon.
You're firing three shots per round, right? So what you need to do is average this over 5 rounds. First three rounds every one goes right. Fourth round is one auto miss for the misfire and two more shots at -2 to hit and damage. The fifth round is only a single shot because the Gunslinger had to clear the jam as a move action. Now see how the average damage over those five rounds stacks up.
My guess is that the Gunslinger doesn't do as much damage as you suspect.
|
|
My guess is that the Gunslinger doesn't do as much damage as you suspect.
And it's now my opinion too. :)
At the light of these arguments, my concerns are more against the "no misfire" rule of advanced firearms. These advanced firearms should still misfire, not be available at all in any world that isn't more contemporary than fantasy ; or if they exist, have a raw price in the book that takes into account the Steadfest ability in them.
are you factoring in, at touch ac range that a crit is pretty much auto confirm?
|
|
It is but don't worry it's still balanced.
Yeah, I guess that now we know that you're not gonna use guns, thanks for your intervention. I'll just coup de grace this so we don't get back to "guns : overpowered" again.
The subject was about gun training, but the real issue seems to be more about advanced firearms and the lack of misfire in them. We'd better point it before these weapons make it to their final version, and what I suggest is a clear mention that these weapons should only appear in more modern universes and can misfire but don't risk to explode.Or, at best, as really, really costly artefacts in more classical worlds - and by costly I mean something like 50 000 GP for a masterwork gun which drifted from the future or an alternate plan, doesn't misfire (when using the bullets it comes with), and comes with a belt containing a limited quantity of special metal bullets in an unknown metal. Good luck reverse-engineering and crafting new ones, suffering again any misfire with any metal used... but at least your weapon can't break, so it's a win.
If it really needs to be precised, numbers and mechanisms are only exemples.
|
|
It is but don't worry it's still balanced.Yeah, I guess that now we know that you're not gonna use guns, thanks for your intervention. I'll just coup de grace this so we don't get back to "guns : overpowered" again.
The subject was about gun training, but the real issue seems to be more about advanced firearms and the lack of misfire in them. We'd better point it before these weapons make it to their final version, and what I suggest is a clear mention that these weapons should only appear in more modern universes and can misfire but don't risk to explode.
Or, at best, as really, really costly artefacts in more classical worlds - and by costly I mean something like 50 000 GP for a masterwork gun which drifted from the future or an alternate plan, misfires only on a natural 1 and comes with a belt containing a limited quantity of special metal bullets in adamantium. Good luck reverse-engineering and crafting new ones.
Yeah I liked how you cleverly ignored the part where I proved that a gunslinger could out damage a bow fighter and then you want to change the issue to changing the gunslinger instead of guns.
|
|
Yeah I liked how you cleverly ignored the part where I proved that a gunslinger could out damage a bow fighter and then you want to change the issue to changing the gunslinger instead of guns.
Guns will not change, advanced firearms can still be discussed and changed before they become a detail in Ultimate Combat - but a detail able to open loopholes.
So if you got instead any proposition or idea to put on the table about what CAN -and- SHOULD be changed about the gunslinger or weapons that are not set in stone yet, I'll be honored to know your opinion.Take a breath, please. Let's not get all flamey here.
Agreed. I was gonna post something a bit longer that was "cleverly" going to express repartee, but I just deleted a paragraph to keep the topic in the civil and light-hearted state I started it. And I intend to keep it this way.
|
|
Take a breath, please. Let's not get all flamey here.
How is it 'flamey' to be sarcastic to someone who refuses to stay with one argument?
After the examples I posted instead of adressing the topic of that thread he wants to start a different thread altogether.
And are you guys saying 'optimized' when you really mean 'one-dimensional'
A character with stats like...
STR 20, DEX 18, CON 18, INT 6, WIS 6, CHA 8.
Isn't optimized its one-sided (power gamed, munchkined, whatever).
You show me an example of a hero in liturature with stats like that. Thats not a hero, its a collection of numbers, that I will bet that when played at the table, the player comes up with all sorts of clever plans and ideas, despite their character's retard stats.
Take a breath, please. Let's not get all flamey here.How is it 'flamey' to be sarcastic to someone who refuses to stay with one argument?
After the examples I posted instead of adressing the topic of that thread he wants to start a different thread altogether.
And are you guys saying 'optimized' when you really mean 'one-dimensional'
A character with stats like...
STR 20, DEX 18, CON 18, INT 6, WIS 6, CHA 8.
Isn't optimized its one-sided (power gamed, munchkined, whatever).
You show me an example of a hero in liturature with stats like that. Thats not a hero, its a collection of numbers, that I will bet that when played at the table, the player comes up with all sorts of clever plans and ideas, despite their character's retard stats.
Overdark, being sarcastic with someone is a one-way ticket to flame land. It shows zero respect and only serves as an attack, not a counterpoint to his or her argument. If you wish to make counterpoints, address the issues at hand.
I would go on, but I'm pretty sure that ground has been covered by several hundred other posts and mine won't solve anything.
I don't want this discussion to turn into another flame war.
Happy thoughts.
|
|
After the examples I posted instead of adressing the topic of that thread he wants to start a different thread altogether.
Your previous thread was locked seconds before I could post the text you see at the beginning of this topic. Please keep the sarcasm I had the decency and politeness to not express against the arguments that made your two previous topics be locked for yourself, my friend.
Isn't optimized its one-sided (power gamed, munchkined, whatever).
"Munchkin" is also a game reality, probably way more than using under-optimized pregens to make comparisons. And even "heavy-optimization", to say the least, doesn't mean a bad RP whatever the situation. I've got a friend playing a demi-ogre barbarian with 5 Intel, 5 Wisdom and 13 Cha, and everytime he speaks for his character, I swear to Thor and Odin we sigh painfully and lose real, tasty neurons. Useless to say that he never comes with incredible plans, or they are incredibly suicidal and stupid. Only one time in ten levels, he comically found the solution to an enigma during a court scenario. He even almost took us into prison by being unknowlingly lacking of respect to the shadow elves' king. My fighter got 13 Int, not because I wanted to take Combat Expertise (which I never even thought about taking), but he also got 7 Wisdom and Charisma, which got him to be rejected by the elven princess, a redhead bard and even a whore. The only bonus he gets in diplomatics and intimidation is with nobility and imperials because of his general statute and nobility family, and even the soldiers see him more as a trusty tactician than a fellow brother-in-arms. Trying to overcome this lack of "face" and lack of temperament is an important part of his RP.
And I would say, even if the guys are power gamed, who cares if their party is fine with it ? Is YOUR way of playing better because you decide it ? I know I couldn't play in a party interested only in huge stats and not assuming and playing fully their characters stats, but it doesn't change the fact that if such characters seem balanced to each other, we can safely say that the mechanisms they use is balanced too.
And guns, in the equation - or at least, normal guns - give high advantages to high risk. And when the risk slaps you in the face, you can say goodbye to your advantages long enough to balance it with other mechanisms like the bow. So, pretty much what Stephen said they intended them to be.
...what I suggest is a clear mention that these weapons should only appear in more modern universes and can misfire but don't risk to explode.
Or, at best, as really, really costly artefacts in more classical worlds - and by costly I mean something like 50 000 GP for a masterwork gun which drifted from the future or an alternate plan, doesn't misfire (when using the bullets it comes with), and comes with a belt containing a limited quantity of special metal bullets in an unknown metal. Good luck reverse-engineering and crafting new ones, suffering again any misfire with any metal used... but at least your weapon can't break, so it's a win.If it really needs to be precised, numbers and mechanisms are only exemples.
I more or less agree, Maxx. Advanced firearms should still have a misfire chance, since they could possibly "jam", but they shouldn't explode. Again, There are two ways to go with the advanced firearms. 1) They are better, upgraded versions of the early firearms, only 20-30 years later, or 2) super advanced firearms like the true revolvers, repeating rifles, etc.
Personally, I would like them to be improved versions of the old guns. A revolver is more or less an early pistol style with the revolving cylinder mechanism; while the rifle is simply a misket with a rifled barrel, perhaps even a bolt-action type loading system, or even a musket with an action-lever and tube mag that holds 12 bullets. Maybe such weapons as these should only be restricted to gunslingers who craft them at higher levels?
In any case, the advanced guns need a misfire, but should lack the explosion chance. That way, it equivalently just jams, and Quick Clear unjams it and allows it to function again. Also, something really needs to be done to allow the gunslnger to use all his attacks, whether its a musket, pistol, or blunderbuss build without having to result to the Dead Shot deed.
|
I posted this on another thread but no one is commenting... let me know what you guys think.
1. As per PRPG Table 7-12 (p. 175), a projectile weapon has hardness 5 and 5 hit points (they probably made that rule thinking about a longbow); the final version of UC should specify how many hit points a one handed firearm has (pistol) and a two-handed firearm (musket). My thoughts are that since the main working part of the gun is metal, pistols should be hardness 10 and 10 hit points, as per a light metal hafted weapon, and muskets should be hardness 10 and 20 hit points, as per a one-handed metal hafted weapon.
2. Now, about your proposed rule on misfire weapon damage (i.e. "If a weapon gains the broken condition from an effect, it takes damage equal to half its hit points +1.") Instead of half its hit points +1, I recommend you use a fixed number equal to the weapon's base hit points +1. For instance, using my two proposed hit point values above, a misfire would then cause 6 points of damage to a pistol and 11 damage to a musket. Why a fixed number you say? Answer: to provide a tangible advantage to those carrying a +5 musket instead of a +1 holy axiomatic musket... They have the same gp value, but the former has 70 hit points and the latter has 30 hit points. Thus, it makes no sense that the guy who invests in the super hard +5 musket deals 36 points of damage to his weapon on a misfire while the other guy only deals 16 points. By making it a fixed amount, say 11 points for a musket, the guy with a +5 musket can thus misfire 3 times without gaining the broken condition (11 x 3 = 33 points, not enough to reduce it under 35; on the fourth misfire, his weapon has taken 44 hp (70 - 44 = 26 hp) and now gains the broken condition).
3. In light of my suggestions in paragraph 2, above, I also propose that Quick Clear restores a non-fixed amount of Quick Clear damage equal to all the misfire damage taken thus far (i.e. you're basically cleaning/clearing any residue preventing the gun to operate properly, and that takes about the same time all the time regardless of the amount of crap in the barrel...) Thus, a guy with a +5 musket is rewarded in the sense that he can misfire 6 times (11 x 6 = 66) before he can worry about using Quick Clear. This improves Grit economy and provides incentive to invest in a +5 weapon instead of the usual +1 something something something type of weapon... it also gives you a weapon that has 70 hp, so if someone wants to sunder your gun it's a bit harder (i.e. the same reason that a swordsman would like a +5 sword over a +1 s something something something sword...)
(for the record, I didn't eat a pickle for this one but I just came back from the Chinese buffet... he he he... Chinese buffet then a discussion on misfires / gunpowder... coincidence?? O_O )
|
|
I commented your proposition in the other topic.
By making it a fixed amount, say 11 points for a musket, the guy with a +5 musket can thus misfire 3 times without gaining the broken condition (11 x 3 = 33 points, not enough to reduce it under 35; on the fourth misfire, his weapon has taken 44 hp (70 - 44 = 26 hp) and now gains the broken condition).The principle of misfire IS to gain the broken condition, not a loss of HP that might -eventually- lead to a broken weapon when it happens too much. Gunslingers can clear quickly their weapon, there is no reason to attenuate what is probably the major balancing point of the guns.
Someone with a +5 musket already got a bonus over someone with a +1 musket in the sense that trying to sunder it will be close to impossible, even when already broken.
I'm totally opposed to the idea of misfire being damage suffered on the weapon instead of a direct broken statute when misfiring. If someone wants to be rewarded with a hard-to-misfire weapon, and so completely negate the major issue of using guns, he'd better start to save money for his +1 Steadfest weapon... which has by the way a +5 weapon price all in all.
|
|
Just saying, the original core assumption in the other thread was that guns are so powerful that anyone, even a non-trained PC, could outdamage a bow fighter with them. More hits = more damage, anyone else remember reading that?
Math proves that assumption to be patently false.
The big damage is coming from one of two things, depending on how you look at it: the Gunslinger's gun training, or the failure of advanced firearms to misfire.
The secret answer is that both things are actually to blame. Anytime advanced firearms are used, any type of large static damage bonus is going to be exponentially more effective. It could be an inquisitors Bane judgement, it doesn't have to be Gun Training. Sneak attack, as ciretose is fond of pointing out, will also hit hard. But sneak attacks and bane judgements can roll ones; straight dex-to-damage won't. And all of that is inherently wrapped up in advanced firearms not misfiring. If they misfire, the damage capability is properly balanced by the misfire chance.
What have I come to? I'm actually advocating for more of the thing that I dislike most about the class. Sigh.
Anyway, I'm going to stop checking on this thread. I've said my peace, some people agree and some don't. Them's the interwebs.